Leader Hoyer Discussing TARP on House Floor

... seconds and agree with the gentlewoman to say this was to restrain the bush administration. i now yield one minute to the gentleman from maryland, the majority leader. the speaker pro tempore: the distinguished gentleman from maryland, the majority leader, is recognized for a majority leader's minute. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman. i thank the distinguished chairman of the committee for yielding time. and i rise in opposition to this motion for disapproval. the resolution of disapproval. i listened to the gentlelady from north carolina's debate and it occurs to me that there must be real parallels in 1929 and 1930 and 1931 and 1932 and, yes, even in 1933 and 1934 as the government responded, as the american people responded to what not had been responded to during four years of the hoover administration to try to staunch the fall of the economy which led ultimately to 25% to 30% unemployment and long food lines. i'm sure we're going to be hearing rhetoric which will blame the obama administration, which is after all been in office for some 36 hours for the problems that confront our country. but in fact no president in recent memory has inherited conditions here and around the world more difficult than this president has inherited. the majority of the president's -- president bush's party did not support him in trying to respond to the crisis that confronts us. in fact, less than half voted for the original tarp. as the gentlelady from north carolina has pointed out, she was not one of them. she did not believe that a response was an appropate or at this -- at least this response was not appropriate. i disagreed then and disagree now. we in a bipartisan way supported the bush administration's request for not $350 billion but the $700 billion. we are the ones, however, that put constraints on that. and we said you need to come back. we are the ones who also notwithstanding the failure of the bush administration to request it put yesterday in a bipartisan vote additional constraints for accountability and transparency and for focusing on those folks who are at risk of losing their homes. the gentlelady, i know, did not vote for that either. today, i think that every member of the house is thinking back to words we said in a similar debate four months ago when the tarp was originally in front of us. and wondering whether we can still stand by them. mr. speaker, i know i can stand by mine. here's what i said the first time tarp came to the floor. and i would remind people this was a proposal by president bush and by secretary paulson, supported by federal reserve chairman bernanke, appointed by president bush. the democrats listened to the president, republican president, but our president of our country and we responded. i said this, imagine if we do nothing today. millions more homes will likely be foreclosured on, banks will unable to lend, the economy might dry up across america. that was my quote. we responded. we responded with a $700 billion bill, half of which has now been allocated and promised. in ways different than the bush administration originally said it was going to do it because it saw the facts changing. the vote on tarp was one of the most difficult any of us have ever taken, certainly one of the largest commitments that this country has taken. and i noted that none of us, whichever way we voted, are completely happy with tarp's results so far. however, a principal advisor to john mccain, mr. zandy, said this is necessary. it may not be desirable from a voting standpoint but it is necessary from our country's standpoint, from our economy's standpoint. the worst we have seen since the hoover administration. i stand by my words because i remain convinced that inaction would have been far more dangerous and far more costly. since the house took that unpopular vote the flow of unnecessary lending has begun to resume not fast enough, not in a way that has brought our economy back, not in a way that has staunched the loss of jobs, but every economist that i ...